Not really like us in 94/95 as far as I can see. We spent big, and were already established top of the league material from the previous season. Leicester have spent peanuts in comparison and nearly got relegated last season.

Ranieri has obviously played his cards right and is an experienced manager, though not at winning leagues.

The only really comparison I can see to Rovers is the consistency of the first eleven, once he settled on it. As well as the "team spirit" that everyone keeps citing. That sort of goes hand in hand with the "whole town/city getting behind them for something special" which I think happened in 95 too, and arguably doesn't happen to the same extent at a big club.

But I think fluke is the biggest part of it. If by fluke you mean the reigning Champions having an absolute shocker, the best team in the country slipping up unexpectedly every few weeks, the supposed biggest club in the country going through their worst time in recent history, and Arsenal....well...failing to not "do an Arsenal".

I do think they'll fall away though tbh. They won most their games by sitting back and countering. Due to what's happened the 'lesser' clubs aren't going to let them sit back now, they'll be a role-reversal and they'll have to start taking it to teams. I think Mahrez is the only player they have suited to that. I predicted they'll be a lot of 0-0 draws for them before the end of the season. Norwich very nearly got one, and I think Leicester will struggle to find last minute winners every week against teams not playing to their strengths.

RoryoftheRovers wrote:I think that Leicester's position shows the lack of quality of the Premier League this year.

While I welcome an underdog doing the impossible, it has been more about the inept displays from some of the big boys.

That's rather disrespectful to Leicester. 72 points after 33 games would normally see a side top or at least challenging for the title. No doubt the bigger names have underachieved this season, which is why they're running away with the league. But they've won 21 and lost just 3. You can't pin that down as attributable to what's gone on elsewhere. They're where they are on merit.

RoryoftheRovers wrote:I think that Leicester's position shows the lack of quality of the Premier League this year.

While I welcome an underdog doing the impossible, it has been more about the inept displays from some of the big boys.

That's rather disrespectful to Leicester. 72 points after 33 games would normally see a side top or at least challenging for the title. No doubt the bigger names have underachieved this season, which is why they're running away with the league. But they've won 21 and lost just 3. You can't pin that down as attributable to what's gone on elsewhere. They're where they are on merit.

I know i'm taking quite a bit away from Leicester in that statement and I do believe they've played excellently this season and deserve to be where they are. However, had Man City and Chelsea played to the level they did last season I think the pressure etc would have seen Leicester falter.

RoryoftheRovers wrote:
I know i'm taking quite a bit away from Leicester in that statement and I do believe they've played excellently this season and deserve to be where they are. However, had Man City and Chelsea played to the level they did last season I think the pressure etc would have seen Leicester falter.

It's possible. But I think what's actually happened is that Man City, Chelsea, et al haven't played at the same level because they're the ones who've buckled under pressure trying to keep up with Leicester. City and Arsenal were up there with them back in January, but they're the ones who've stalled. If one of the bigger clubs was leading the table playing like Leicester have, they'd get the credit for it and no one would say it's down to their competitors failing to meet expectations. They may not be made up of expensive big-name superstars, but they're the best PL team I've seen for some years.